-
Posting in a thread in one of my groups reminded me of something.
So, I have this novel I have planned. It will be ultimately fueled by religious attention (aka someone finds a religious text from 'God' or something that states GLBT people should be hung and bled out on a cross.) This text will cause a revolution that, basically, will take over the United States (maybe other parts of the world, but probably only the United States. Said president during the time of the novel will be very religious and will want to enforce laws, which will, ultimately, lead to a corruption within the government [aka assasinations for those who don't agree with her to replace those that do agree.])
Now, the reason I'm creating this thread is because I plan on speaking with religious individuals about this (before I write this novel, I want to be able to speak with as many different religions as I can.) My question is this--can I, legally, get away with using a church's view on what could/should be done should such a situation ever arise (AKA how the churches would deal with this problem.)
This wouldn't be exposing agendas against particular churches, but it would be used to fund the story with real-life ideas about how homosexuality should be dealt with. I'm just concerned if I could get away with that if I passed it off as fiction (and nothing but.) I mean, I could always say I fictionalized things I've been told (thereby sliding around any legal situations,) but... I dunno.
Thoughts?
(I don't want a religion vs. homosexuality debate here. I want honest opinions on the legal nature of using said sources to help create the story.) -
I think that you can as long as you don't use real names and places and or real people's names. People use the bible everyday to benefit their own causes. Consider Dan Brown who wrote The Da Vinci Code and Also Angels and Demons--both good reads by the way,most people already know how I stand towards religion but I always love a good read. Dan Brown uses not only the church but went one father and used the vatican and the catholic religion and it has caused quite a stir but I haven't heard of him being sued and he uses real people (although most are dust in their graves now).
You might consider doing some reading of religious texts and/or books like Brown's to get a feel for how he did it,not to copy his style of course,but to see how you can incorporate the church and its religious holdings in your story;then add a little magic dust and your book will read well enough to be believable and yet you can set your worries aside because it is a work of fiction.
I would suggest not using the book you write as a ranting outlet unless your going for the media circus type of thing and then people will label you a religious fanatic/be concise and straightforward and know your facts,so that your book is an airtight piece of material and only the fanatics attack it because,well--they're fanatics. Be aware of the controversies that writing such a book will stir up--Dan Brown probably never thought his book would take off in the way that it did.
Ultimately,it is a book of fiction that you are writing but all the nutcases against and for your kind of book will come out of the woodwork if it ever gets published--be clear,concise,and honest in your writing and use reasoning--think things through and you can't lose.
Your book sounds like it's going to be a good one and I like your idea--hmmm...I would consider using your idea and creating my own book but,I won't. Good luck with your writing. -
You're welcomed,anytime--you caught me at a caffeine hit--And I am 'talking' too much. -
I guess you could get away with it... but, you'll have to remember that not all mambers of a certain religion are 'that way'. A lot has changed since ancient texts, etc, and only the blind followers would accept any new scripts as the law of what they should do. Most others would go
at the words, and then move on, wondering what fool would be dense enough to try to make it an actual law.
THere's also the thing with the division of religion and state. Because something is written in a bible or holy book, there's a very slim chance that any government party would have the 'nads to attempt to bring it to law... would be political suicide, really. (Unless it's a military state, or some reason there's a military state... then....
you could probably work it in without reader backlash).
-
Be careful!
I know this is to be a work of fiction, but there are religious fanatics out there in the real world who can't (or don't want to) tell the difference between fact and fiction. Be wary also of which religions you choose and which side they're on
Remember Salman Rushdie? He's cost the British taxpayer (me, among others) millions in cost of security, hideaways etc when a fatwa was placed upon him.
-
-
Most writers know this when writing on a controversial topic. Telling him to be careful is like telling him to censor himself

As to the topic, I say go for it. You're doing research to make your story as accurate as you can. It's kind of like how if I were to write a fictional account of a man in WWII, and I researched the war, would I then be responsible for citing everything I learned prior to writing the novel? -
-
Besides, I'm more afraid of Twilight fangirls than religious fanatics. At least they won't assemble in groups and trample you. All I'd have to worry about is getting stoned.

lol, that's so bad.
Anyway, thanks for your opinions, guys. The novel will, most likely, not be written for a good while, but it's always good to know stuff beforehand. -
"Telling him to be careful is like telling him to censor himself"
True!
But self censorship can be a good thing. There are enough nutters out there, most of them not needing an excuse but willing to use someone's writing as an excuse.
I've never yet met a living martyr.
-
-
-
I'd say, to be farsighted, pick the views of three or four churches that have differing but similar POV's that you're looking for, and mix them together into one. And then make up a fake name for the church. That way, while religious readers may say, "hey, that kinda sounds like how my church stands on the issue", they can't say "hey, now that is my church, this guy sucks, what's he doing dragging my church into the bad guy role" kind of thing. It's a bit of fictionalizing to give the readers that critical buffer that will save you a lot of hate mail.

In fact, for more "realism", you could have, in this future, a mega church organization that was made of several churches officially reuniting. Then you can give the new church a legit-sounding name and use all the church POV's you want from the ones who joined.
Just an idea.
-
It's fine. Although you might mention in the foreword that it IS a work of fiction. (People seemed to forget that when reading Dan Brown's work- lol)
A suggestion would be- using someone as an Anti-christ, to make it something the church would really have to be concerned about. -
Ugh! I'm such a teenager! When you wrote "religious text" for a second I thought you meant a text from a cell phone... I was thinking that no one would really start a revolution over a text message and then it hit me and now I feel stupid...
Anyway, to answer the original question... I think that some psychopath would come at you with an axe, but I don't think you get could sued or anything if it was strictly a fictional novel. But this is just a guess. -
-
hahahahahahahahahahahahaha. Oh. God. That kills me... with an axe.

*dies*
I is no afraid of psycopaths. XD
In all honesty, I've run into them online. Been cyberstalked by a couple. SCary stuff there. -
-

I have never been cyberstalked, but it must get pretty annoying.
I thought I was once, though, until I found out it was a friend just trying to freak me out. I mean, when the stalker tells you where you live and they're gonna get you... it's a little creepy.
-
-
The real dangerous one was known for making death threats and saying he would kidnap children. AND, to top it off, he was (and still is) a publisher, that hasn't been shut down for his ways!
The other guy wasn't exactly dangerous in the sense that he might kill me if we met on the street. He literally became obsessed with me over the four day period I knew him.
So... just depends. You want a stalker that loves you, or ones that hate you?
Both are dangerous. -
-
Definitely freaky.
Maybe it was a rhetorical question, but I would rather have a stalker that hates me. That way it would most likely be something you said to him, instead of just some nut who is obsessed with their "relationships" with women. Well, in my case anyway. -
-
Actually, it wasn't rhetorical. Both have their disadvantages, obviously, but I think the former would be the one that would keep you alive for long periods of time. Remember Annie Wilkes? She loved Paul, so much she broke his legs.
-
-
(Ugh, Annie Wilkes was creepy. I never really watched the show much (re-runs by the time I got around to it), but I know what you mean.)
But, depends on whether your main criteria is staying alive... okay, that didn't sound right, nor was it a good argument. What I mean is, there is just something more psycho about someone who is stalking you because they like you, and someone who just want to kill you, well, I don't think that would effect you emotionally as much. -
-
'You know I love you Paul,' she said, setting the head of her sludgehammer against her hand.
'Please, Annie--don't!'
'I can't Paul. This is the only way.'
'Please Annie! Annie NO!'
*breaks left ankle with sludgehammer, then right*
If it makes you feel any better, she cuts his legs off in the book.
*dies*
But, you know, this would be a really good topic of discussion. You should post a topic.
(I've posted two in the apst fifteen minutes. I'd feel like a whore otherwise.)
PS: Can I say whore if I'm not calling someone one? But, the question should be, can I call myself a whore and get away with it?
*lawl*
-
-
-
-
-
-
-


KodyBoye
May 29 2:11 AM
Reply